'Is there any way that you can control your pension fund and decide what it is invested in, rather than paying a fee to a pension company to do that for you?'
Mr. Llama, cheers. The PS3 browser crashes at every opportunity, but happily worked for the Diplomacy site, so I managed to avoid wrecking the game for everyone else by missing the first deadline.
Is there any way that you can control your pension fund and decide what it is invested in, rather than paying a fee to a pension company to do that for you?
Sure there is, a SIPP. You can open a SIPP with any of a big range of 'platform' providers, such as Hargreaves Lansdown (the market leader), Barclays Stockbrokers, Fidelity, Alliance Trust, AJBell, Interactive Investor, and many others. Costs are very low, and you can invest in individual shares, unit trusts, investment trusts, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), bonds, cash deposits, and usually foreign shares as well. (The exact list depends on the platform, but most will allow all of these). You can also open a SIPP in addition to any company scheme you have, as long as you don't exceed the total limits for annual contributions.
Question: would someone working full time on the minimum wage earn £10,500 a year?
Yes.
Based on the new £6.50 rate x 40 hours x 52 weeks = £13,520
If you're on minimum wage odds are you won't get paid for a lunch break, so full time hours would be 37.5 hours paid (i.e. 40hrs-(30min * 5), assuming a 5 day week).
Question: would someone working full time on the minimum wage earn £10,500 a year?
Yes.
Based on the new £6.50 rate x 40 hours x 52 weeks = £13,520
If you're on minimum wage odds are you won't get paid for a lunch break, so full time hours would be 37.5 hours paid (i.e. 40hrs-(30min * 5), assuming a 5 day week).
Well you should be getting at least 20 mins paid, if working over 6 hrs...
Edit: just rechecked, and actually they don't have to be paid...shocking!
Super Hodge contradiction in minutes - "Polls are meaningless"...."opposition sitting on a 3-4 point lead less than 14 months before a general election is in the doings"....as the MacDonalds advert says "I'm loving it".
Go for the real deal - not these local impersonators - great title btw..
"Miliband’s Budget speech was one of the most wretched I’ve ever seen from a party leader. In fact, it wasn’t a speech at all. It was a series of Labour Party press releases randomly thrown together without anything even resembling a coherent textual – never mind intellectual – structure."
He still hasn't forgiven Ed for missing out on that job Ed's brother promised him, has he.
Are you claiming Miliband's response was a good speech, or just trying to divert away from its hideousness.
"Britain should target the assets of Russian oligarchs in London if more sanctions are adopted against Moscow over Ukraine, France’s foreign minister has said."
'Disagree completely. All the evidence is that LAB will do much better in the marginals than the country as a whole. Remember the Ashcroft polling, National 2010 LD to LAB 17%. LAB>CON marginals 2010 LD to LAB 35%'
What was the date of that polling?
This was published in Sept 2013 when LAB was doing a bit worse than now. The broad picture was supported by the UKIP donor funded Survation single constituency polling in December.
It was also very similar to the Ashcroft 2011 marginals polling.
Question: would someone working full time on the minimum wage earn £10,500 a year?
Yes.
Based on the new £6.50 rate x 40 hours x 52 weeks = £13,520
If you're on minimum wage odds are you won't get paid for a lunch break, so full time hours would be 37.5 hours paid (i.e. 40hrs-(30min * 5), assuming a 5 day week).
Indeed so.
Some do, some don't but even a 37.5 hours day clears the £10,500 threshold.
Hit the blue chips, hit the pension companies, hit tax avoiders with up front payments, hit annuities providers. This is a budget that Denis Healey would have been proud of...
Adam Boulton on Sky News just said the consensus at Westminster was that Miliband's budget response was "poor, just like Ed Ball's response to the Autumn Statement."
Question: would someone working full time on the minimum wage earn £10,500 a year?
Yes.
Based on the new £6.50 rate x 40 hours x 52 weeks = £13,520
If you're on minimum wage odds are you won't get paid for a lunch break, so full time hours would be 37.5 hours paid (i.e. 40hrs-(30min * 5), assuming a 5 day week).
Well you should be getting at least 20 mins paid, if working over 6 hrs...
Edit: just rechecked, and actually they don't have to be paid...shocking!
Paid? For time when you're not working? Dear me, no.
If pension companies want people to buy annunities, then they should have to compete to make them attractive. For too long they haven't been.
They've been too comfortable in locking people into them.
The most shocking thing about annuities is that if you plunge your pension pot into one on Monday and die on Tuesday, your beneficiaries get nothing and the insurance company keeps the lot.
'Disagree completely. All the evidence is that LAB will do much better in the marginals than the country as a whole. Remember the Ashcroft polling, National 2010 LD to LAB 17%. LAB>CON marginals 2010 LD to LAB 35%'
What was the date of that polling?
This was published in Sept 2013 when LAB was doing a bit worse than now. The broad picture was supported by the UKIP donor funded Survation single constituency polling in December.
It was also very similar to the Ashcroft 2011 marginals polling.
I do remember a few on here saying the Wythenshawe bye-election will show how good Lord Ashcrofts polling really is:
Ashcrofts poll a week before the election:
Labour - 61% Ukip - 15% Tory - 14% Lib Dem - 5%
Actual result:
Labour - 55.3% Ukip - 18.0% Tory - 14.5% Lib Dem - 4.9%
Interesting nugget in the unemployment figures released earlier was an explosion in self employment (+211k in 9 months) and a drop in employment (-60k). I know quite a few people who with few other options have gone self employed - at least on paper anyway as they don't seem to have found much in the way of paid work into their fledgling new businesses.
On minimum wage and tax free allowance, whilst some will work a full time week on it, I'm sure a lot jobs are part time so it doesn't impact those people. And as millions have discovered any increase in tax free allowance is offset by cuts to I'm work benefits.
And for the benefit of Mr Nabavi I'm happy to confirm my prejudice against the policies and leading politicians of the Conservative Party.
Let me make sure I've got this straight though, you can take out 30 grand as a lump sum tax free and you don't have to buy an annuity with the remainder, you could just keep it in the Stockmarket and live off Vodafone/Glaxxo Dividends ?
I think that's correct, except that the tax-free lump sum is (as now) limited to 25% of the total pot, so in practice can be a lot more than £30K.
The £30K figure relates to 'trivial commutation' - if your total pension pot is less than £30K, you'll be able to take 100% of it out as a tax-free lump sum (compared with the current limit of £18K).
[For completeness, it's worth pointing out that you already might have had the option of remaining invested rather than buying an annuity (i.e. 'income drawdown'), but the rules for this are complex and most people wouldn't qualify.]
Is there any way that you can control your pension fund and decide what it is invested in, rather than paying a fee to a pension company to do that for you?
Obviously you can put savings into an ISA, but you don't then get the tax relief from your original contributions.
But any income you take from an ISA is tax free, as opposed to pension income
'Disagree completely. All the evidence is that LAB will do much better in the marginals than the country as a whole. Remember the Ashcroft polling, National 2010 LD to LAB 17%. LAB>CON marginals 2010 LD to LAB 35%'
What was the date of that polling?
This was published in Sept 2013 when LAB was doing a bit worse than now. The broad picture was supported by the UKIP donor funded Survation single constituency polling in December.
It was also very similar to the Ashcroft 2011 marginals polling.
I do remember a few on here saying the Wythenshawe bye-election will show how good Lord Ashcrofts polling really is:
Ashcrofts poll a week before the election:
Labour - 61% Ukip - 15% Tory - 14% Lib Dem - 5%
Actual result:
Labour - 55.3% Ukip - 18.0% Tory - 14.5% Lib Dem - 4.9%
Not far off.
If the polls are overestimating Labour by 10% - i.e. 3 points, the Tories will be very pleased. But it shows how difficult to predict this is, since Ashcroft was polling plenty of people only a week before.
"Britain should target the assets of Russian oligarchs in London if more sanctions are adopted against Moscow over Ukraine, France’s foreign minister has said."
odds against that happening i wonders
"The Falkland Islanders have spoken so clearly about their future, and now other countries right across the world, I hope, will respect and revere this very, very clear result." - David Cameron, March 2013.
Super Hodge contradiction in minutes - "Polls are meaningless"...."opposition sitting on a 3-4 point lead less than 14 months before a general election is in the doings"....as the MacDonalds advert says "I'm loving it".
Go for the real deal - not these local impersonators - great title btw..
"Miliband’s Budget speech was one of the most wretched I’ve ever seen from a party leader. In fact, it wasn’t a speech at all. It was a series of Labour Party press releases randomly thrown together without anything even resembling a coherent textual – never mind intellectual – structure."
He still hasn't forgiven Ed for missing out on that job Ed's brother promised him, has he.
Are you claiming Miliband's response was a good speech, or just trying to divert away from its hideousness.
I meant here on PB. I had no idea about the American connection; I'd recently seen the film 'Up', and a certain ex-posters ability to change the topic from any bad news reminded me of Dug.
I am available to the Republican or Democratic campaigns if they want to use my brilliance. Not to Ron Paul, though,
Dan Hodges does make a very important point about the lack of economic strategy within Labour, and it is sobering for the wiser Labour supporter. The "24 Tory tax rises" nonsense today is not only obtuse but smacks of "let's put out an easy soundbite just to make it look as though we have something to say". It doesn't even sit coherently with their too-far-too-fast cuts mantra. Are Labour really suggesting they can formulate a balanced economy without cuts and without tax rises? Of course they aren't. They are just being facile.
Since Ed Miliband became leader he hasn't managed to re-establish a new Labour position with regard to spending and taxation, and I don't think he, or his advisers, know what to do. When the economy imploded in 2008 it was awful for Brown but also embarrassing for the Tories in that they had hitherto promised to match Brown's spending. When the walls fell in, they blushed, deleted the hard drive and repositioned themselves very quickly.
The crash somewhat suited them in that it enabled a return to their hinterland of sound money and balanced books. But the reverse is true for Labour. They have always won votes with policies to invest and improve public services; something that is very difficult to promise during a time of austerity and a still large deficit.
More experienced political followers than me will be able to guess whether Miliband can become PM without developing a coherent economic strategy. Could he? Could he scrape in by default, via a twist of electoral bias and the quirk of the coalition unpopularity? If he does get in without a detailed plan I think it would be a shame, because if the country deserves one thing after five years of austerity and belt-tightening it is a government which at least has the guts to tell us what it is going to do.
My guess is that Miliband and Balls will try to fudge their way through a manifesto in the knowledge that the economic realities of government won't sit at all well with what their natural supporters want. It'll be shameless but it could ensure a defeat isn't snatched from the jaws of victory.
If pension companies want people to buy annunities, then they should have to compete to make them attractive. For too long they haven't been.
They've been too comfortable in locking people into them.
The most shocking thing about annuities is that if you plunge your pension pot into one on Monday and die on Tuesday, your beneficiaries get nothing and the insurance company keeps the lot.
There are 'some' guarantees. depending on your policy etc, but pretty much yes.
Super Hodge contradiction in minutes - "Polls are meaningless"...."opposition sitting on a 3-4 point lead less than 14 months before a general election is in the doings"....as the MacDonalds advert says "I'm loving it".
Go for the real deal - not these local impersonators - great title btw..
"Miliband’s Budget speech was one of the most wretched I’ve ever seen from a party leader. In fact, it wasn’t a speech at all. It was a series of Labour Party press releases randomly thrown together without anything even resembling a coherent textual – never mind intellectual – structure."
He still hasn't forgiven Ed for missing out on that job Ed's brother promised him, has he.
Are you claiming Miliband's response was a good speech, or just trying to divert away from its hideousness.
I meant here on PB. I had no idea about the American connection; I'd recently seen the film 'Up', and a certain ex-posters ability to change the topic from any bad news reminded me of Dug.
I am available to the Republican or Democratic campaigns if they want to use my brilliance. Not to Ron Paul, though,
Ros Altmann - not an easy lady to please! - is pleased by the budget:
There are so many good news aspects for pension savings in this Budget that it is hard to know what to pick out. The overall message is, pension savings are going to be more flexible at the point of retirement. You will be able to save more into pensions knowing that there will be less restriction on what you can do with the money.
Adam Boulton on Sky News just said the consensus at Westminster was that Miliband's budget response was "poor, just like Ed Ball's response to the Autumn Statement."
"But there was a big, Budget-sized hole in his reaction to the Chancellor's statement - with almost no mention at all of anything that George Osborne had announced.
This is a real danger of overly prepared political statements; the actual news is missed."
Dan Hodges does make a very important point about the lack of economic strategy within Labour, and it is sobering for the wiser Labour supporter. The "24 Tory tax rises" nonsense today is not only obtuse but smacks of "let's put out an easy soundbite just to make it look as though we have something to say". It doesn't even sit coherently with their too-far-too-fast cuts mantra. Are Labour really suggesting they can formulate a balanced economy without cuts and without tax rises? Of course they aren't. They are just being facile.
Since Ed Miliband became leader he hasn't managed to re-establish a new Labour position with regard to spending and taxation, and I don't think he, or his advisers, know what to do. When the economy imploded in 2008 it was awful for Brown but also embarrassing for the Tories in that they had hitherto promised to match Brown's spending. When the walls fell in, they blushed, deleted the hard drive and repositioned themselves very quickly.
The crash somewhat suited them in that it enabled a return to their hinterland of sound money and balanced books. But the reverse is true for Labour. They have always won votes with policies to invest and improve public services; something that is very difficult to promise during a time of austerity and a still large deficit.
More experienced political followers than me will be able to guess whether Miliband can become PM without developing a coherent economic strategy. Could he? Could he scrape in by default, via a twist of electoral bias and the quirk of the coalition unpopularity? If he does get in without a detailed plan I think it would be a shame, because if the country deserves one thing after five years of austerity and belt-tightening it is a government which at least has the guts to tell us what it is going to do.
My guess is that Miliband and Balls will try to fudge their way through a manifesto in the knowledge that the economic realities of government won't sit at all well with what their natural supporters want. It'll be shameless but it could ensure a defeat isn't snatched from the jaws of victory.
I think Ed knows what he wants to do.. but not how to do it. He wants rainbow's and ponies for all...
I.P.P.R. - "You need to earn £125k a year to make the most of the ISA changes"...."Institute for Public Policy Research press release
ISAs: £125,000 income needed to make the most of new tax break
Reacting to the Government’s announcement in today’s Budget on a new £15,000 per year tax free limit for Individual Savings Accounts, IPPR says people need to be earning £125,000 a year to make the most of it.
Nick Pearce, IPPR Director, said:
“The Chancellor is right to try and encourage saving but it would have been far better to focus on low to middle earners, for example through a scheme that matched their savings up to a certain limit, rather than to give further tax relief to the better off.
“The new flexibility to transfer funds between cash and stocks ISAs announced today is welcome, particularly if it encourages risk averse savers who might otherwise have stopped saving when they hit their cash ISA limit.
“But increasing the ISA limit to £15,000 is a regressive move. Even if someone is able to save 20 per cent of their disposable income, they would need to be earning around £125,000 to make the most of the new £15,000 a year limit. At a time of austerity these earners should not be the priority for additional tax breaks.”
Adam Boulton on Sky News just said the consensus at Westminster was that Miliband's budget response was "poor, just like Ed Ball's response to the Autumn Statement."
"But there was a big, Budget-sized hole in his reaction to the Chancellor's statement - with almost no mention at all of anything that George Osborne had announced.
This is a real danger of overly prepared political statements; the actual news is missed."
I'm patiently waiting for the media to start tearing Miliband and Balls a new arsehole over their lack of economic policy. As McBride's book makes clear, there is hardly a person in the whole country with more Treasury experience than Labour's top pair. Which perhaps indicates their lack of an openly stated policy is due more to gutlessness than anything else.
Dan Hodges does make a very important point about the lack of economic strategy within Labour, and it is sobering for the wiser Labour supporter. The "24 Tory tax rises" nonsense today is not only obtuse but smacks of "let's put out an easy soundbite just to make it look as though we have something to say". It doesn't even sit coherently with their too-far-too-fast cuts mantra. Are Labour really suggesting they can formulate a balanced economy without cuts and without tax rises? Of course they aren't. They are just being facile.
Since Ed Miliband became leader he hasn't managed to re-establish a new Labour position with regard to spending and taxation, and I don't think he, or his advisers, know what to do. When the economy imploded in 2008 it was awful for Brown but also embarrassing for the Tories in that they had hitherto promised to match Brown's spending. When the walls fell in, they blushed, deleted the hard drive and repositioned themselves very quickly.
The crash somewhat suited them in that it enabled a return to their hinterland of sound money and balanced books. But the reverse is true for Labour. They have always won votes with policies to invest and improve public services; something that is very difficult to promise during a time of austerity and a still large deficit.
More experienced political followers than me will be able to guess whether Miliband can become PM without developing a coherent economic strategy. Could he? Could he scrape in by default, via a twist of electoral bias and the quirk of the coalition unpopularity? If he does get in without a detailed plan I think it would be a shame, because if the country deserves one thing after five years of austerity and belt-tightening it is a government which at least has the guts to tell us what it is going to do.
My guess is that Miliband and Balls will try to fudge their way through a manifesto in the knowledge that the economic realities of government won't sit at all well with what their natural supporters want. It'll be shameless but it could ensure a defeat isn't snatched from the jaws of victory.
I think Ed knows what he wants to do.. but not how to do it. He wants rainbow's and ponies for all...
The "out of touch/wrong type of recovery" is the Lab equivalent of the Cons' "didn't fix the roof when the sun was shining". It doesn't really matter what else they say they are creating a mood.
For the Cons that was powerful (not powerful enough) in categorising Lab as useless and profligate. For Lab, categorising the Cons as toffs in it for themselves, as you @Fenster pointed out earlier, might just be sufficient.
The key issue is whether, in the cold, sober light of day come polling day GE2015, the voters allow their heart to rule their head.
@compouter2 - What utter garbage from the IPPR. Lots of people who earn nothing like £125K a year will have £15K lump sums available to invest in ISAs - from maturing life policies, downsizing, legacies, redundancy payments, lump-sums on retirement, past savings, etc etc.
I.P.P.R. - "You need to earn £125k a year to make the most of the ISA changes"...."Institute for Public Policy Research press release
ISAs: £125,000 income needed to make the most of new tax break
Reacting to the Government’s announcement in today’s Budget on a new £15,000 per year tax free limit for Individual Savings Accounts, IPPR says people need to be earning £125,000 a year to make the most of it.
Nick Pearce, IPPR Director, said:
“The Chancellor is right to try and encourage saving but it would have been far better to focus on low to middle earners, for example through a scheme that matched their savings up to a certain limit, rather than to give further tax relief to the better off.
“The new flexibility to transfer funds between cash and stocks ISAs announced today is welcome, particularly if it encourages risk averse savers who might otherwise have stopped saving when they hit their cash ISA limit.
“But increasing the ISA limit to £15,000 is a regressive move. Even if someone is able to save 20 per cent of their disposable income, they would need to be earning around £125,000 to make the most of the new £15,000 a year limit. At a time of austerity these earners should not be the priority for additional tax breaks.”
I sense a headline coming from this ;-)
IPPR are a leftist front organisation for Labour. It's best not to take them too seriously.
Also, that level of income would be required to make maximum use of the new higher limit. However if one wanted to save £7500 cash tax free, one would not require gross income of £125k. The maximum limit is clearly there for aspirationals, a very Tory way of doing things, but most people will be proportions of the new higher limit above £5.5k for cash but probably not all the way up to £15k.
From a purely selfish viewpoint this budget is excellent news for me. I started a SIPP when they were first announced,the tax benefits were overwhelmingly obvious,save 40% on the way in,get 25% out tax free,and no tax on the funds,or capital gains.Then there were no limits on annual contributions,it was extraordinarily advantageous for those with surplus earnings. The problem was how to get it all out and spend it before you die. The GAD limits restrict drawdown,but now I can pull it out as fast as I want. I hate annuities,and would never have bought one willingly,but would have had to buy £20K worth just to empty my SIPP,now I don't have to. The ISA increases are very welcome,but most people will not have £15k/annum to save. I don't think many people will benefit from these changes,only a very few have pension pots big enough to warrant drawdown,most people will know little or nothing about the intricacies of SIPPs,GAD rates,drawdown etc, The trivial commutation changes will affect many people,as many will have a "Trivial" pot,and a good option is a lump sum.
@compouter2 - What utter garbage from the IPPR. Lots of people who earn nothing like £125K a year will have £15K lump sums available to invest in ISAs - from maturing life policies, downsizing, legacies, redundancy payments, lump-sums on retirement, past savings, etc etc.
But not much of a return until interest rates go up.
@compouter2 - What utter garbage from the IPPR. Lots of people who earn nothing like £125K a year will have £15K lump sums available to invest in ISAs - from maturing life policies, downsizing, legacies, redundancy payments, lump-sums on retirement, past savings, etc etc.
It's also people who may receive a large performance related bonus over the old £5.5k limit. They would now be able to save that in an ISA up to £15k. A lot of people who have OTE jobs will be happy with this as they have very variable income levels and having a high ISA limit will allow them to put more money aside when they have a very good year.
@TSE - For Nighthawks this evening, and in recognition of the positive news that the budget had on Hargreaves Lansdown (Stock +14.5%) - Wurzles - One for the Bristol City
So a budget for rich pensioners. But nowt for ordinary folk, nowt on the cost of living crisis.
Might help the Tories win back some wavering blue rinse ex-Tory Kippers, but that's about it.
That there may be close to what certain headlines may say.
You mean what you want them to say. The personal allowance is going up by £500, a tax saving of £100 per year for people earning the minimum wage and working at least 31 hours a week, which is a huge number of people. Any headline that this does nothing for regular people is going to be ridiculed. Even the Guardian aren't taking that line. Maybe the Morning Star will be more to your liking...
But not much of a return until interest rates go up.
Well, one of the really excellent things Osborne has done is - at last - remove the barmy distinction between cash ISAs and stocks'n'shares ISAs (what took so long?). So you've now got complete freedom to invest your ISA in whatever mix of cash deposits or other investments makes sense. Given that many blue-chip shares yield up to 5% dividends, you can hope for a very decent income return, with a possible capital appreciation as well, albeit not risk-free.
'Disagree completely. All the evidence is that LAB will do much better in the marginals than the country as a whole. Remember the Ashcroft polling, National 2010 LD to LAB 17%. LAB>CON marginals 2010 LD to LAB 35%'
What was the date of that polling?
This was published in Sept 2013 when LAB was doing a bit worse than now. The broad picture was supported by the UKIP donor funded Survation single constituency polling in December.
It was also very similar to the Ashcroft 2011 marginals polling.
The Survation constituency polling found that Con were doing much worse than national polling in EVERY seat surveyed - ie including safe Con seats.
It provides no evidence of worse performance in marginals.
If pension companies want people to buy annunities, then they should have to compete to make them attractive. For too long they haven't been.
They've been too comfortable in locking people into them.
The most shocking thing about annuities is that if you plunge your pension pot into one on Monday and die on Tuesday, your beneficiaries get nothing and the insurance company keeps the lot.
So a budget for rich pensioners. But nowt for ordinary folk, nowt on the cost of living crisis.
Might help the Tories win back some wavering blue rinse ex-Tory Kippers, but that's about it.
That there may be close to what certain headlines may say.
You mean what you want them to say. The personal allowance is going up by £500, a tax saving of £100 per year for people earning the minimum wage and working at least 31 hours a week, which is a huge number of people. Any headline that this does nothing for regular people is going to be ridiculed. Even the Guardian aren't taking that line. Maybe the Morning Star will be more to your liking...
We will see what headlines the papers print in the morning very soon. Love to see the one telling all the cash strapped families across the country they can now invest upto £15,000 in an ISA. There will be celebrations in the streets.
"Britain should target the assets of Russian oligarchs in London if more sanctions are adopted against Moscow over Ukraine, France’s foreign minister has said."
odds against that happening i wonders
WE like certain Russians regardless of their source of money !
But not much of a return until interest rates go up.
Well, one of the really excellent things Osborne has done is - at last - remove the barmy distinction between cash ISAs and stocks'n'shares ISAs (what took so long?). So you've now got complete freedom to invest your ISA in whatever mix of cash deposits or other investments makes sense. Given that many blue-chip shares yield up to 5% dividends, you can hope for a very decent income return, with a possible capital appreciation as well, albeit not risk-free.
With all the ISA and Junior ISA Changes I've not noticed anything on moving the Child Trust Fund to a Junior ISA - have I missed something or is this an uncorrected anomaly?
But not much of a return until interest rates go up.
Well, one of the really excellent things Osborne has done is - at last - remove the barmy distinction between cash ISAs and stocks'n'shares ISAs (what took so long?). So you've now got complete freedom to invest your ISA in whatever mix of cash deposits or other investments makes sense. Given that many blue-chip shares yield up to 5% dividends, you can hope for a very decent income return, with a possible capital appreciation as well, albeit not risk-free.
With all the ISA and Junior ISA Changes I've not noticed anything on moving the Child Trust Fund to a Junior ISA - have I missed something or is this an uncorrected anomaly?
Ros Altmann - not an easy lady to please! - is pleased by the budget:
There are so many good news aspects for pension savings in this Budget that it is hard to know what to pick out. The overall message is, pension savings are going to be more flexible at the point of retirement. You will be able to save more into pensions knowing that there will be less restriction on what you can do with the money.
Yup, this is good news. A really positive set of measures. Pension companies will have to work a bit harder for their money, which is presumably why their shares are crashing currently. The trick now is to live long enough to take advantage!
So a budget for rich pensioners. But nowt for ordinary folk, nowt on the cost of living crisis.
Might help the Tories win back some wavering blue rinse ex-Tory Kippers, but that's about it.
That there may be close to what certain headlines may say.
You mean what you want them to say. The personal allowance is going up by £500, a tax saving of £100 per year for people earning the minimum wage and working at least 31 hours a week, which is a huge number of people. Any headline that this does nothing for regular people is going to be ridiculed. Even the Guardian aren't taking that line. Maybe the Morning Star will be more to your liking...
We will see what headlines the papers print in the morning very soon. Love to see the one telling all the cash strapped families across the country they can now invest upto £15,000 in an ISA. There will be celebrations in the streets.
Yes, up to £15k. You seem to be missing that point. There are a lot of middle income people who would like to save more than the current limit and will now be able to do so.
Also, this cash-strapped line is going to end soon. Private sector wage growth for December and January was up over 2%, higher than the rate of inflation. Labour's (and by extension your) attack line on this subject is going to come to a very abrupt end. I pointed this out late last year when the trend was there with private sector wage growth hitting 1.4%. Once private sector wage growth hits 2.5% (around May on the current trend) enough people will see their gross income rise faster than costs and Labour will be in a pile of dog doo.
With all the ISA and Junior ISA Changes I've not noticed anything on moving the Child Trust Fund to a Junior ISA - have I missed something or is this an uncorrected anomaly?
So a budget for rich pensioners. But nowt for ordinary folk, nowt on the cost of living crisis.
Might help the Tories win back some wavering blue rinse ex-Tory Kippers, but that's about it.
That there may be close to what certain headlines may say.
You mean what you want them to say. The personal allowance is going up by £500, a tax saving of £100 per year for people earning the minimum wage and working at least 31 hours a week, which is a huge number of people. Any headline that this does nothing for regular people is going to be ridiculed. Even the Guardian aren't taking that line. Maybe the Morning Star will be more to your liking...
We will see what headlines the papers print in the morning very soon. Love to see the one telling all the cash strapped families across the country they can now invest upto £15,000 in an ISA. There will be celebrations in the streets.
So the Labour party should oppose savers placing up to £15,000 pa in an ISA ?
So a budget for rich pensioners. But nowt for ordinary folk, nowt on the cost of living crisis.
Might help the Tories win back some wavering blue rinse ex-Tory Kippers, but that's about it.
That there may be close to what certain headlines may say.
You mean what you want them to say. The personal allowance is going up by £500, a tax saving of £100 per year for people earning the minimum wage and working at least 31 hours a week, which is a huge number of people. Any headline that this does nothing for regular people is going to be ridiculed. Even the Guardian aren't taking that line. Maybe the Morning Star will be more to your liking...
Outside of pensions it was not exactly a whoopee budget. The increased personal allowance is an extra two pounds a week or so at the minimum wage level, which is nice but not game changing. And it needs to be set against the VAT rises, welfare cuts and tax credit reductions that many low wage earners have endured.
On PB - Many cannot see further than their own bank balance/financial circle. Is it any wonder there has been so much scratching of heads of why there hasn't been a polling crossover.
As our host says, the budget is a start for the Tories' fightback on UKIP. But only a start.
For all that, we might well see a bit of a bump in the Conservatives' polling after the budget, which should get very good coverage in the tabloids tomorrow. It's quite a feat, however, to engineer a contribution to the public finances that is popular with the group that will be paying it.
But not much of a return until interest rates go up.
Well, one of the really excellent things Osborne has done is - at last - remove the barmy distinction between cash ISAs and stocks'n'shares ISAs (what took so long?). So you've now got complete freedom to invest your ISA in whatever mix of cash deposits or other investments makes sense. Given that many blue-chip shares yield up to 5% dividends, you can hope for a very decent income return, with a possible capital appreciation as well, albeit not risk-free.
With all the ISA and Junior ISA Changes I've not noticed anything on moving the Child Trust Fund to a Junior ISA - have I missed something or is this an uncorrected anomaly?
The CTF is scrapped - now a zombie fund thing.
Sorry - I know that, what I meant was is there anything about moving those zombie funds (for the small % of people who have them) into the much more flexible (and higher paying) Junior ISA. Edit - already answered
With all the ISA and Junior ISA Changes I've not noticed anything on moving the Child Trust Fund to a Junior ISA - have I missed something or is this an uncorrected anomaly?
Presumably the delay in implementation is related to IT issues.
Thanks - I hadn't noticed that (presumably because of the timing - 23rd December announcement?!) and so expected it today in the middle of all the other ISA changes.
The pension reforms look like the most significant part of this budget although I am a little concerned that many people with small pensions will get lump sums and then look for state support. There is a little of the spend now and worry later mentality in it. But much of the easy money for pension providers that made small pensions such poor investments will now dry up and that is a good thing.
Economically, the steps taken to encourage investment, particulary P2P investment, along with the better focussed and more generous support for export credit might prove more important. It does make you wonder how a country which has not run a trade surplus since 1997 had the least generous and most expensive export credit facilities in the EU. What on earth have our political classes been doing?
As I predicted this morning the response and the lack of quality in it has got some attention and media notice. Some of this is because the election is getting closer and some of it is because it is a repeat of the Balls performance at the Autumn statement. I expect the gap in perceptions of economic competence and preferred Chancellor to grow and it is already worrying for an opposition 14 months away from an election.
@IsabelHardman: Balls: 'Miliband had written pages of his speech which weren't used in the end… had to fill space by going on and on about Gove's comments'
So a budget for rich pensioners. But nowt for ordinary folk, nowt on the cost of living crisis.
Might help the Tories win back some wavering blue rinse ex-Tory Kippers, but that's about it.
That there may be close to what certain headlines may say.
You mean what you want them to say. The personal allowance is going up by £500, a tax saving of £100 per year for people earning the minimum wage and working at least 31 hours a week, which is a huge number of people. Any headline that this does nothing for regular people is going to be ridiculed. Even the Guardian aren't taking that line. Maybe the Morning Star will be more to your liking...
Outside of pensions it was not exactly a whoopee budget. The increased personal allowance is an extra two pounds a week or so at the minimum wage level, which is nice but not game changing. And it needs to be set against the VAT rises, welfare cuts and tax credit reductions that many low wage earners have endured.
Yes, but the headlines on the latter moves have already been had and forgotten. Talking about tomorrow's and Sunday's headlines you can really only take into account measure taken in this budget. The Morning Star would bring up the stuff you have mentioned, but serious newspapers won't and the budget still hasn't unravelled, which is some kind of record for Osborne.
I think for savers it was a great budget though, up to £15k a year tax free savings is excellent.
As I said, current headlines won't take into account past moves only current moves, and the current moves are favourable to people on lower and middle incomes. The cancellation of the petrol duty rise will be welcome news for millions of motorists and commuters in lower income brackets.
I can see the poster already on fuel duty. A picture of a petrol price board with the current price under the government and on the other side a picture of the same board with prices 20p higher under Labour. It is a policy area where the government have made huge strides in keeping petrol prices down and I expect them to trumpet it very loudly to motorists in the run up to the election.
The pension reforms look like the most significant part of this budget although I am a little concerned that many people with small pensions will get lump sums and then look for state support. There is a little of the spend now and worry later mentality in it.
I'm not sure I see the problem - there isn't a means tested pension anymore, so if people splurge then they will just have to cope with the basic state pension the same as someone who had saved nothing.
"APD was criticised for being based on the distance from London to a country's capital city. Thus, the tax on a 4,400-mile flight to Trinidad is taxed at as much as £332, while a trip to Hawaii, 7,000 miles away, attracts a £268 tax because the US capital is closer to London."
Well I never knew that, and quite bonkers in relation to the places like the US & Canada...
The pension reforms look like the most significant part of this budget although I am a little concerned that many people with small pensions will get lump sums and then look for state support. There is a little of the spend now and worry later mentality in it. But much of the easy money for pension providers that made small pensions such poor investments will now dry up and that is a good thing.
Economically, the steps taken to encourage investment, particulary P2P investment, along with the better focussed and more generous support for export credit might prove more important. It does make you wonder how a country which has not run a trade surplus since 1997 had the least generous and most expensive export credit facilities in the EU. What on earth have our political classes been doing?
As I predicted this morning the response and the lack of quality in it has got some attention and media notice. Some of this is because the election is getting closer and some of it is because it is a repeat of the Balls performance at the Autumn statement. I expect the gap in perceptions of economic competence and preferred Chancellor to grow and it is already worrying for an opposition 14 months away from an election.
I just wish we were not still borrowing so much.
As is widely known on PB I'm hardly the greatest cheer leader of poor Ed Miliband but in all my many years watching the LotO budget response, today has to be one of the most dire it's been my displeasure to endure.
Fortunately Ed Miliband will never enjoy the privilege of a regular audience with Her Majesty which was some succour to reflect upon when he sat down after a desperately awful display of ineptitude.
Blimey - never before has a Budget provoked such a response from my client bank....
OGH may be underestimating the impact of all these changes, even increasing NSI Premium Bond holdings and doubling the number of Million £ prizes, the new pensioner savings bond, Shares ISAs being able to go back to Cash ISAs, all in Cash not 50% limit.
He's nailed a lot of personal finance bug-bears and don't even get me started on the pensions changes, my workload has just exploded for that....
The pension reforms look like the most significant part of this budget although I am a little concerned that many people with small pensions will get lump sums and then look for state support. There is a little of the spend now and worry later mentality in it.
I'm not sure I see the problem - there isn't a means tested pension anymore, so if people splurge then they will just have to cope with the basic state pension the same as someone who had saved nothing.
The pension reforms look like the most significant part of this budget although I am a little concerned that many people with small pensions will get lump sums and then look for state support. There is a little of the spend now and worry later mentality in it.
I'm not sure I see the problem - there isn't a means tested pension anymore, so if people splurge then they will just have to cope with the basic state pension the same as someone who had saved nothing.
"Looking forward to the election next year, their assessment of Labour’s prospects was bleak, “Much more of this and we are going to need a Devon Loch scenario to win.”
For readers too young to either directly recall the Devon Loch Derby in 1956, or to have seen countless repeats of the incident on Derby day specials in the 1970s and 1980s, back when the Derby was still a major national sporting event, the clip below should help."
Someone at Labour Uncut doesn't know their Derby from their Grand National
So a budget for rich pensioners. But nowt for ordinary folk, nowt on the cost of living crisis.
Might help the Tories win back some wavering blue rinse ex-Tory Kippers, but that's about it.
That there may be close to what certain headlines may say.
You mean what you want them to say. The personal allowance is going up by £500, a tax saving of £100 per year for people earning the minimum wage and working at least 31 hours a week, which is a huge number of people. Any headline that this does nothing for regular people is going to be ridiculed. Even the Guardian aren't taking that line. Maybe the Morning Star will be more to your liking...
Outside of pensions it was not exactly a whoopee budget. The increased personal allowance is an extra two pounds a week or so at the minimum wage level, which is nice but not game changing. And it needs to be set against the VAT rises, welfare cuts and tax credit reductions that many low wage earners have endured.
Yes, but the headlines on the latter moves have already been had and forgotten. Talking about tomorrow's and Sunday's headlines you can really only take into account measure taken in this budget. The Morning Star would bring up the stuff you have mentioned, but serious newspapers won't and the budget still hasn't unravelled, which is some kind of record for Osborne.
I think for savers it was a great budget though, up to £15k a year tax free savings is excellent.
As I said, current headlines won't take into account past moves only current moves, and the current moves are favourable to people on lower and middle incomes. The cancellation of the petrol duty rise will be welcome news for millions of motorists and commuters in lower income brackets.
I can see the poster already on fuel duty. A picture of a petrol price board with the current price under the government and on the other side a picture of the same board with prices 20p higher under Labour. It is a policy area where the government have made huge strides in keeping petrol prices down and I expect them to trumpet it very loudly to motorists in the run up to the election.
Hmmm. Not sure I agree. Petrol is a lot more than it was. The Tories can claim it would have been higher still, but that's as effective as Labour saying we could have come out of the downturn sooner if other policies had been followed. Both well may be true, but no-one really cares: we are where we are.
I am sure the headlines will be broadly positive: newspapers are mostly Tory-leaning, after all. But I doubt that there are many measures in the budget that will change votes, except perhaps some from UKIP back to the Tories.
"This was a pre-election Budget," saysshrieked TUC general secretary Frances O'Grady. "It will be paid for by further years of austerity, public services brought to near collapse, public sector pay cuts and a welfare cap that bites into the safety net that any of us might need."
The pension reforms look like the most significant part of this budget although I am a little concerned that many people with small pensions will get lump sums and then look for state support. There is a little of the spend now and worry later mentality in it. But much of the easy money for pension providers that made small pensions such poor investments will now dry up and that is a good thing.
Economically, the steps taken to encourage investment, particulary P2P investment, along with the better focussed and more generous support for export credit might prove more important. It does make you wonder how a country which has not run a trade surplus since 1997 had the least generous and most expensive export credit facilities in the EU. What on earth have our political classes been doing?
As I predicted this morning the response and the lack of quality in it has got some attention and media notice. Some of this is because the election is getting closer and some of it is because it is a repeat of the Balls performance at the Autumn statement. I expect the gap in perceptions of economic competence and preferred Chancellor to grow and it is already worrying for an opposition 14 months away from an election.
I just wish we were not still borrowing so much.
As is widely known on PB I'm hardly the greatest cheer leader of poor Ed Miliband but in all my many years watching the LotO budget response, today has to be one of the most dire it's been my displeasure to endure.
Fortunately Ed Miliband will never enjoy the privilege of a regular audience with Her Majesty which was some succour to reflect upon when he sat down after a desperately awful display of ineptitude.
THe fact that you go on repeating this doesn't make it any more the case.
The 2010 LDs in the marginals make the Tory task daunting.
I wonder when Dan wrote the meat of that. Last week, I reckon.
Miliband's speech was no worse that countless other LOTO responses to budgets there have been over the years. It will be forgotten by this time tomorrow. Except on here, of course.
In the pre-election financial year, 2014-15, the deficit is forecast to be an enormous £95bn. It's a massive failure to achieve the Conservative's stated policy "for eliminating the bulk of the structural current budget deficit over a Parliament." It compares very badly with the forecast for borrowing of £37bn that was made in the emergency budget in June 2010.
Further problem being that the Opposition is unable to skewer the Conservatives over this policy failure, because they opposed the target in the first place.
It's reminiscent of the electoral choice facing the voters in 2005, post the Iraq debacle. In that case the support for war given to the government by the Opposition meant that the country was denied the cathartic debate on Iraq that it wanted. So it seems that in 2015 we will again be denied an honest debate on the deficit and what to do about it.
I wonder when Dan wrote the meat of that. Last week, I reckon.
Miliband's speech was no worse that countless other LOTO responses to budgets there have been over the years. It will be forgotten by this time tomorrow. Except on here, of course.
The only coverage of his response I've seen was to point out how he didn't even engage and just used his usual stump speech.
It isn't par for the course for the BBC to say 'responding is one of the most difficult jobs in politics, but...'
This isn't going to set any long term narratives, but it's disingenuous to pretend this wasn't a particularly poor effort.
If pension companies want people to buy annunities, then they should have to compete to make them attractive. For too long they haven't been.
They've been too comfortable in locking people into them.
The most shocking thing about annuities is that if you plunge your pension pot into one on Monday and die on Tuesday, your beneficiaries get nothing and the insurance company keeps the lot.
Why ?
Why is that shocking or why do they work like that?
Reading this thread after a manic few hours, it is startling how many plain wrong things have been posted on here about personal finance - I'm tempted to reply to each and every error but it would clutter up the whole thread.
Ros Altmann - not an easy lady to please! - is pleased by the budget:
There are so many good news aspects for pension savings in this Budget that it is hard to know what to pick out. The overall message is, pension savings are going to be more flexible at the point of retirement. You will be able to save more into pensions knowing that there will be less restriction on what you can do with the money.
Yup, this is good news. A really positive set of measures. Pension companies will have to work a bit harder for their money, which is presumably why their shares are crashing currently. The trick now is to live long enough to take advantage!
Comments
'Is there any way that you can control your pension fund and decide what it is invested in, rather than paying a fee to a pension company to do that for you?'
Yes,lots of people do that.
Based on the new £6.50 rate x 40 hours x 52 weeks = £13,520
Both Ed's responses has been utterly woeful.
They've been too comfortable in locking people into them.
Edit: just rechecked, and actually they don't have to be paid...shocking!
http://americanelephant.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/obama-2012-squirrel.jpg
http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/joe-biden-paul-ryan-vp-debate-benghazi-look-a-squirrel-political-humor.jpg
"Britain should target the assets of Russian oligarchs in London if more sanctions are adopted against Moscow over Ukraine, France’s foreign minister has said."
odds against that happening i wonders
It was also very similar to the Ashcroft 2011 marginals polling.
Some do, some don't but even a 37.5 hours day clears the £10,500 threshold.
One of the speakers at the recent UKIP conference said >55 year olds are 43% of the electorate.
Ashcrofts poll a week before the election:
Labour - 61%
Ukip - 15%
Tory - 14%
Lib Dem - 5%
Actual result:
Labour - 55.3%
Ukip - 18.0%
Tory - 14.5%
Lib Dem - 4.9%
Not far off.
On minimum wage and tax free allowance, whilst some will work a full time week on it, I'm sure a lot jobs are part time so it doesn't impact those people. And as millions have discovered any increase in tax free allowance is offset by cuts to I'm work benefits.
And for the benefit of Mr Nabavi I'm happy to confirm my prejudice against the policies and leading politicians of the Conservative Party.
If the sun was white and cold and came out at night it would be the moon.
- David Cameron, March 2013.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands_sovereignty_referendum,_2013
I am available to the Republican or Democratic campaigns if they want to use my brilliance. Not to Ron Paul, though,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQb84PNxu5A
Since Ed Miliband became leader he hasn't managed to re-establish a new Labour position with regard to spending and taxation, and I don't think he, or his advisers, know what to do. When the economy imploded in 2008 it was awful for Brown but also embarrassing for the Tories in that they had hitherto promised to match Brown's spending. When the walls fell in, they blushed, deleted the hard drive and repositioned themselves very quickly.
The crash somewhat suited them in that it enabled a return to their hinterland of sound money and balanced books. But the reverse is true for Labour. They have always won votes with policies to invest and improve public services; something that is very difficult to promise during a time of austerity and a still large deficit.
More experienced political followers than me will be able to guess whether Miliband can become PM without developing a coherent economic strategy. Could he? Could he scrape in by default, via a twist of electoral bias and the quirk of the coalition unpopularity? If he does get in without a detailed plan I think it would be a shame, because if the country deserves one thing after five years of austerity and belt-tightening it is a government which at least has the guts to tell us what it is going to do.
My guess is that Miliband and Balls will try to fudge their way through a manifesto in the knowledge that the economic realities of government won't sit at all well with what their natural supporters want. It'll be shameless but it could ensure a defeat isn't snatched from the jaws of victory.
There are so many good news aspects for pension savings in this Budget that it is hard to know what to pick out. The overall message is, pension savings are going to be more flexible at the point of retirement. You will be able to save more into pensions knowing that there will be less restriction on what you can do with the money.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/03/in-praise-of-george-osbornes-pensions-revolution/
http://news.sky.com/story/1228606/budget-2014-bad-day-in-the-office-for-miliband
"But there was a big, Budget-sized hole in his reaction to the Chancellor's statement - with almost no mention at all of anything that George Osborne had announced.
This is a real danger of overly prepared political statements; the actual news is missed."
ISAs: £125,000 income needed to make the most of new tax break
Reacting to the Government’s announcement in today’s Budget on a new £15,000 per year tax free limit for Individual Savings Accounts, IPPR says people need to be earning £125,000 a year to make the most of it.
Nick Pearce, IPPR Director, said:
“The Chancellor is right to try and encourage saving but it would have been far better to focus on low to middle earners, for example through a scheme that matched their savings up to a certain limit, rather than to give further tax relief to the better off.
“The new flexibility to transfer funds between cash and stocks ISAs announced today is welcome, particularly if it encourages risk averse savers who might otherwise have stopped saving when they hit their cash ISA limit.
“But increasing the ISA limit to £15,000 is a regressive move. Even if someone is able to save 20 per cent of their disposable income, they would need to be earning around £125,000 to make the most of the new £15,000 a year limit. At a time of austerity these earners should not be the priority for additional tax breaks.”
I sense a headline coming from this ;-)
But then that would require opinions and positions, which other posters in the past never put themselves in either.....
The "out of touch/wrong type of recovery" is the Lab equivalent of the Cons' "didn't fix the roof when the sun was shining". It doesn't really matter what else they say they are creating a mood.
For the Cons that was powerful (not powerful enough) in categorising Lab as useless and profligate. For Lab, categorising the Cons as toffs in it for themselves, as you @Fenster pointed out earlier, might just be sufficient.
The key issue is whether, in the cold, sober light of day come polling day GE2015, the voters allow their heart to rule their head.
Not 100% sure they will.
Welcome, especially if you are a Debbie Harry fan.
Also, that level of income would be required to make maximum use of the new higher limit. However if one wanted to save £7500 cash tax free, one would not require gross income of £125k. The maximum limit is clearly there for aspirationals, a very Tory way of doing things, but most people will be proportions of the new higher limit above £5.5k for cash but probably not all the way up to £15k.
The problem was how to get it all out and spend it before you die. The GAD limits restrict drawdown,but now I can pull it out as fast as I want.
I hate annuities,and would never have bought one willingly,but would have had to buy £20K worth just to empty my SIPP,now I don't have to.
The ISA increases are very welcome,but most people will not have £15k/annum to save.
I don't think many people will benefit from these changes,only a very few have pension pots big enough to warrant drawdown,most people will know little or nothing about the intricacies of SIPPs,GAD rates,drawdown etc,
The trivial commutation changes will affect many people,as many will have a "Trivial" pot,and a good option is a lump sum.
So for me a good budget.
Idiots.
It could come from a whole host of other sources.
Like a pension lump sum!!!
My cautious strategy has paid off.
It provides no evidence of worse performance in marginals.
Also, this cash-strapped line is going to end soon. Private sector wage growth for December and January was up over 2%, higher than the rate of inflation. Labour's (and by extension your) attack line on this subject is going to come to a very abrupt end. I pointed this out late last year when the trend was there with private sector wage growth hitting 1.4%. Once private sector wage growth hits 2.5% (around May on the current trend) enough people will see their gross income rise faster than costs and Labour will be in a pile of dog doo.
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/articles/success-child-trust-funds-to-junior-isa-transfers-will-be-permitted
Presumably the delay in implementation is related to IT issues.
One for a yellow box ?
For all that, we might well see a bit of a bump in the Conservatives' polling after the budget, which should get very good coverage in the tabloids tomorrow. It's quite a feat, however, to engineer a contribution to the public finances that is popular with the group that will be paying it.
Economically, the steps taken to encourage investment, particulary P2P investment, along with the better focussed and more generous support for export credit might prove more important. It does make you wonder how a country which has not run a trade surplus since 1997 had the least generous and most expensive export credit facilities in the EU. What on earth have our political classes been doing?
As I predicted this morning the response and the lack of quality in it has got some attention and media notice. Some of this is because the election is getting closer and some of it is because it is a repeat of the Balls performance at the Autumn statement. I expect the gap in perceptions of economic competence and preferred Chancellor to grow and it is already worrying for an opposition 14 months away from an election.
I just wish we were not still borrowing so much.
@IsabelHardman: Balls: 'Miliband had written pages of his speech which weren't used in the end… had to fill space by going on and on about Gove's comments'
I think for savers it was a great budget though, up to £15k a year tax free savings is excellent.
As I said, current headlines won't take into account past moves only current moves, and the current moves are favourable to people on lower and middle incomes. The cancellation of the petrol duty rise will be welcome news for millions of motorists and commuters in lower income brackets.
I can see the poster already on fuel duty. A picture of a petrol price board with the current price under the government and on the other side a picture of the same board with prices 20p higher under Labour. It is a policy area where the government have made huge strides in keeping petrol prices down and I expect them to trumpet it very loudly to motorists in the run up to the election.
Well I never knew that, and quite bonkers in relation to the places like the US & Canada...
Although on reflection, I can well imagine they aren't allowed to effectively make a bet on your longevity.
Fortunately Ed Miliband will never enjoy the privilege of a regular audience with Her Majesty which was some succour to reflect upon when he sat down after a desperately awful display of ineptitude.
OGH may be underestimating the impact of all these changes, even increasing NSI Premium Bond holdings and doubling the number of Million £ prizes, the new pensioner savings bond, Shares ISAs being able to go back to Cash ISAs, all in Cash not 50% limit.
He's nailed a lot of personal finance bug-bears and don't even get me started on the pensions changes, my workload has just exploded for that....
Tom Doran @portraitinflesh 20m
Wow, @DPJHodges thinks Labour's response to the budget was brilliant and offers his unqualified support: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100264442/budget-2014-ed-milibands-wretched-incoherent-response-showed-that-he-is-not-ready-to-be-pm/ … Shocker!
"Looking forward to the election next year, their assessment of Labour’s prospects was bleak, “Much more of this and we are going to need a Devon Loch scenario to win.”
For readers too young to either directly recall the Devon Loch Derby in 1956, or to have seen countless repeats of the incident on Derby day specials in the 1970s and 1980s, back when the Derby was still a major national sporting event, the clip below should help."
Someone at Labour Uncut doesn't know their Derby from their Grand National
I am sure the headlines will be broadly positive: newspapers are mostly Tory-leaning, after all. But I doubt that there are many measures in the budget that will change votes, except perhaps some from UKIP back to the Tories.
The savings stuff is good news.
Diddums.
The 2010 LDs in the marginals make the Tory task daunting.
Miliband's speech was no worse that countless other LOTO responses to budgets there have been over the years. It will be forgotten by this time tomorrow. Except on here, of course.
Further problem being that the Opposition is unable to skewer the Conservatives over this policy failure, because they opposed the target in the first place.
It's reminiscent of the electoral choice facing the voters in 2005, post the Iraq debacle. In that case the support for war given to the government by the Opposition meant that the country was denied the cathartic debate on Iraq that it wanted. So it seems that in 2015 we will again be denied an honest debate on the deficit and what to do about it.
It isn't par for the course for the BBC to say 'responding is one of the most difficult jobs in politics, but...'
This isn't going to set any long term narratives, but it's disingenuous to pretend this wasn't a particularly poor effort.
Yep. I actually agree with some of the labour points made. Will this make life any better for working families on moderate incomes? probably not.
It wasn't an election winning performance. But it wasn;t an election losing one either.
I'll do a few if you will indulge me....
European Elections poll
The YouGov poll found that Labour had 32 per cent support, with the Tories on 24 per cent and Ukip on 23 per cent. The Lib Dems were on 10 per cent.